Worcester County has implemented free inmate phone calls mandated by the legislature a little over a year and a half ago. Although it was well-intended, there have been some unintentional consequences that have come with it.

“Families are calling us and tell us; can you please have the inmates stop calling us? We are trying to live our lives,” said Worcester County Sheriff Lew Evangelidis 

Unintended consequences is the phrase being used to describe the issues free phone calls for inmates has brought up. Evangelidis says most inmates have access to these tablets, if they are in good standing. They can make calls and message on these. 

Phone banks are also widely available. 

According to Evangelidis, families are being called to the point of harassment. 

“They're just calling their families all day, every day, and their families are having a hard time with it. So, in a lot of ways, it's an unintended consequence,” he said. “I would even say it's backfired.”

The sheriff says calls have more than doubled, totaling over one million phone calls a month, and he says it is costing the taxpayers big money. He says the phone bill in Worcester County alone will cost $1.5 million this year and estimates up to $20 million statewide. 

“We are paying for these calls out of our operating budget. Then we rely on the legislature to fund us. Well, so far they haven't been willing to fund it,” said Evangelidis. 

Evangelidis says they have struggled to fund some of the educational programs they had previously provided from the money earned from inmate calls. They are also finding the programs they do have isn’t being as well attended because inmates prefer to make calls instead. 

Back on Beacon Hill, state Sen. Ryan Fattman filed an amendment that would limit free calls to non-violent criminals. 

“We all know that there's tough budget times that are happening in the Commonwealth. The question is, in tough budget times, should we give free phone calls to felons who have committed acts of murder, rape, and violent crimes?” said Fattman. “The answer is no. Of course not. And so my amendment restricts that. according to the law, they're entitled to phone calls. But I don't think taxpayers should be funding calls for criminals. It's just not right.”

Evangelidis says he believes the next best step is to reexamine the program as it is right now and make necessary adjustments. Considering a limit to how many free calls are permitted, for example, could be a way to find a good middle ground.